H P JANAMMA vs SHIVANANJAIAH — 3/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section U/O,43,RULE,1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 27th March 2026.

Case disposed

M.A. - Miscellanuous Appeals

CNR: KAMS300000772026

Filing Number

3/2026

Filing Date

12-Jan-2026

Registration No

3/2026

Registration Date

12-Jan-2026

Court

PRL.SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT, HUNSUR

Judge

921-I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

Decision Date

27-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 09-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section U/O,43,RULE,1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.H P JANAMMA

    Adv. B.S.YOGANANDA KUMAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHIVANANJAIAH

  2. 2.SHIVAMMA

  3. 3.DASHARATHA H S

  4. 4.SHANKARA

  5. 5.JAVARAMMA

  6. 6.H S SACHIN

  7. 7.H S DARSHAN

  8. 8.SHIVAMMA

  9. 9.KUMARI

  10. 10.LANKESHA

  11. 11.MAHADEVA

  12. 12.SAVITHRI

  13. 13.SHASHIKIRANA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 27-Mar-2026

    JudgmentView PDF

    Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of her interim injunction application in a property dispute. The appellate court upheld the trial court's finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for possession, holding that revenue records alone raise only a rebuttable presumption of ownership, which the defendants effectively rebutted through survey reports and evidence showing their continuous 72-year possession. The court emphasized that actual physical possession is the primary consideration in injunction suits, and the balance of convenience favored the defendants who were already in possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  4. 18-Mar-2026

    Orders

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  5. 09-Mar-2026

    Orders

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  6. 07-Mar-2026

    Reply

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  7. 26-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  9. 19-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  10. 09-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  11. 05-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  12. 28-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    I Addl Senior CIVIL Judge And JMFC Hunsur

  13. 14-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 12-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's appeal challenging the trial court's rejection of her interim injunction application in a property dispute. The appellate court upheld the trial court's finding that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for possession, holding that revenue records alone raise only a rebuttable presumption of ownership, which the defendants effectively rebutted through survey reports and evidence showing their continuous 72-year possession. The court emphasized that actual physical possession is the primary consideration in injunction suits, and the balance of convenience favored the defendants who were already in possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case